Honoring those who lost their lives while building, maintaining, and operating California’s world-class transportation system. & Providing information on how to help keep our workers and our highways safe.

Bidder Inquiries

Inquiry #1: Question about the quantity of Precast Jointed Concrete PavementBid Item 56 shows a Quantity of 1,600 CY for PJCPIn sheets 199/357 and 200/357 - Summary of Quantities Q-1 and Q-2 show a quantity of 806 for PJCP - Again in sheet 207/357 - Summary of Quantities Q-9 show a total quantity of 796. The station numbers listed in sheet Q-9 are the same as listed in Q-1 and Q-2What is the correct quantity of PJCP panels?Inquiry submitted 11/15/2017

Inquiry #2: Section 8-1.09 Incentive/Disincentive for Early Completion -- spells out two milestone dates for the project.Segment A, Sta F 198+00 - F 234+00 >> July 15, 2018Segment B, Sta FRT 132+00 - F 198+00 >> October 15, 2018The disincentive penalty amount for the milestones is $ 25,000/day. The section does not spell out what the anticipated start date will be for the project. This inquiry was brought up by most bidders at the pre-bid conference on November 15th. At the prebid, Caltrans presented a slide in which the start of construction was noted as February of 2018. For the purposes of scheduling the project in order to determine if the two milestone dates are achievable, what should the bidders assume to be the approval date of the contract? Contracts typically take anywhere from 2 to 4 months to be approved after the date of the bid. How is it possible to bid the project, with the heavy milestone penalties, without a stated start of construction activities date?

Inquiry submitted 11/17/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 11/20/2017

Response #2:See Addendum 1.Response posted 12/08/2017

Inquiry #3: 1) Bid items 134 and 137 seem to be for the same work. Are these duplicate items? 2) Sheet Q-9, the Minor Concrete (Misc Cstr) table calls out 913 CY of "Island" concrete. In review of the Typical Cross Sections (X), L-Layouts and C-drawings -- for stations FRT 133+63 to 158+70 --- there does not appear to be any island concrete on the project. Please describe where this work is located, or provide a detail of the work. Inquiry submitted 11/20/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 11/20/2017

Response #2:1) Items 134 and 137 are not the same. Item 134 is anchor block for location shown in sheet No.11, while item 137 is for location shown in sheet No. 335.

2)See Addendum 1.Response posted 11/28/2017

Inquiry #4: Bid item nos. 102 and 103 appear to be duplicates of bid item 101. In fact their description includes the "(N)" -- symbol for NOT A PAY ITEM. Will these items be removed by addendum?

Inquiry submitted 11/20/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 11/20/2017

Response #2:See Addendum 1.Response posted 12/08/2017

Inquiry #5: 1) Bid item 42 - Crack Treatment - this work is not called out in the plans, or shown in the Q-sheet tables. Where does this work occur?

2) Note 5 on X-1 calls for a prime coat on new AB/ASB. There is no bid item for Prime Coat?

3) Item 47 - GPI - Paving Grid does not include a corresponding item for the asphalt binder? Will this be paid under the tack coat item, or is it considered incidental to Item 47, or will an item be added?

Inquiry #6: The bid quantity for item 25 (Treated Wood Waste) is 97,200 LB. According to the chart on Q-9, they are allowing for 88,000 lbs for the Remove Roadside Sign work. This quantity requires review. There are only 44 roadside signs to be removed on the project?

Inquiry submitted 11/20/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 11/21/2017

Response #2:See Addendum 1.Response posted 12/08/2017

Inquiry #7: 1) The table on drawing ECQ-1 identifies permanent Erosion Control items of work. There are no bid items for this work. Will items be added for hydromulch, hydroseed, rolled erosion control product (blanket), fiber rolls, compost, and incorporate materials?

2) The drainage work quantity table shows 158 LF of 18" CSP. Bid item 82 is for 182 LF. Why the discrepancy? 3) Bid item 94 is for Culvert Slurry Cement Backfill. There is no slurry cement backfill identified in the drainage drawings or drainage quantity tables. Is this bid item an error?

Inquiry submitted 11/21/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 11/21/2017

Response #2:1, 2, & 3) See Addendum 1.Response posted 12/08/2017

Inquiry #8: Bid item nos 65 and 66 seem to be duplicate bid items for the same work. Will the bid form be corrected? Inquiry submitted 11/21/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 11/21/2017

Response #2:See Addendum 1.Response posted 12/08/2017

Inquiry #9: Can you post the list of prebid attendees?Inquiry submitted 11/30/2017

Inquiry #10: 1.) According to plan sheets SC-36 and SC-46 (plan pages 133 and 143), Temp Crash Cushion (Array TU14) are to be installed; however, there is no bid item for this item of work. Under which bid item are Temp Crash Cushion (Array TU14) going to get paid?2.) According to plan sheets SC-45 and SC-46 (plan pages 142 and 143), Class 1 Delineators are to be installed; however, there is no bid item for this item of work. Under which bid item are Class 1 Delineators going to get paid?

Inquiry #11: The special provisions state that this bid must be on a cost+time basis and that the contractors should not bid less than 210 working days and not more than 350 working days. By nature, cost+time basis contracts may include night and day shifts and weekend work. Yet, the department has included provisions (8-1.09 Below) to deduct additional expenses incurred as a result of acceleration. Please identify and itemize these costs so the contractors can be accordingly.

8-1.09 INCENTIVE/DISINCENTIVE FOR EARLY COMPLETION “At your request, the Department may accelerate its inspection and testing. The Department deducts any additional expenses incurred as a result of the acceleration.

The time limit specified for the completion of the work is considered insufficient to permit completion of the work by working a normal number of hours per day or week on a single shift basis. Should you fail to maintain the progress of the work in conformance with "Progress Schedule (Critical Path Method)" of these special provisions, additional shifts will be required to the extent necessary to ensure that the progress conforms to the above mentioned schedule and that the work will be completed within the time limit specified.

Actions required by the Engineer to perform normal inspection and testing duties will not be considered as contributing to any delay in awarding incentives or to any delay that will require charging disincentives.”

Inquiry submitted 12/04/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 12/04/2017

Response #2:Bid per plans and specs.Response posted 12/13/2017

Inquiry #12: As a follow up to Inquiry #2 and per Addendum No. 1 Section 8-1.09 Incentive/Disincentive for Early Completion revisions please address the following:1) It appears that the milestone requirements have been reduced by 3 months in Segment A and Segment B. Please confirm.2) Please clarify that the new milestones durations are additive and not concurrent.

Response #3:1) The milestones are determined by Section 8-1.04 and the working days in Section 8-1.09.2) The milestone durations are concurrent.

Response posted 12/13/2017

Inquiry #13: 1) Roadway excavation - within the Earthwork quantities chart on Q-3, there does not appear to be an accounting of miscellaneous excavations that will be required for the various Gore Areas; or the 2 ft wide slot (paving section 7) which begins at Sta MMR1 132+63. Is the earthwork chart correct?

2) At the Paving Section 1 areas the grind depth is 0.25'. The existing section is shown as 0.25' AC over the existing PRF, which puts the grind depth at the exact location of the PRF. Typically the depth of cold plane is taken to a level below the PRF which allows for its removal. If the PRF is encountered at the exact depth of cold plane, what is expected in regards to the (e) PRF prior to placing the 0.15' of RHMA?

Inquiry submitted 12/11/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 12/12/2017

Response #2:1) Miscellaneous excavation in the gore areas will be paid by roadway excavation. Bid per the plans.2) Remove entire 0.25' existing AC. Overlay per plans and specs.

Response posted 12/14/2017

Inquiry #14: Follow Up to Inquiry #13

In the miscellaneous excavation that will be required for the Gore Area @ the 2 ft wide slot (paving section 7).

Response #2:1) Existing curb and gutter within specified station limits will be removed completely, see Layout plans.2) See sheet X-8 and layout plans.

Response posted 12/13/2017

Inquiry #15: In the table for Replace Asphalt Concrete Surfacing, Plan Sheet 205, the quantities listed for plan sheet L-9 are significantly overstated. The areas for repairs seem correct but the conversion to cubic yards was not done correctly. Can Caltrans revise the bid quantity for Bid Item #43 to reflect the correct yardage?Inquiry submitted 12/12/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 12/12/2017

Inquiry #16: In the Special Provisions, Caltrans replaced Section 39-2.08, “Intelligent Compaction For Hot Mix Asphalt”, with a new section. Under Section 39-2.08D, “Payment”, it states “Not Used”. On previous projects, there was a bid item for intelligent compaction if it was being required. This project does not have such a bid item. Are we using intelligent compaction on this project?Inquiry submitted 12/12/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 12/12/2017

Response #2:Payment for Intelligent Compaction For Hot Mix Asphalt is included in the payment Hot Mix Asphalt.Response posted 12/15/2017

Inquiry #18: According to plan sheet L-14/15 (plan pages 24-25), contractor will be widening NB Rte. 680 from Station 198+94 to 218+02.45 using structural section No. 9 (0.25' HMA/0.50' AB CL2); however, there is no Traffic Handling provided. Please provide Traffic Handling to show K-Rail or any other form of Traffic Handling/Staging in order to construct widening area. Inquiry submitted 12/12/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 12/13/2017

Response #2:Please bid per plans and specs.Response posted 12/14/2017

Inquiry #19: The project accounts for 913 cy of "Island" minor concrete. Based on a 6" section, this is over 49,000 sf of island concrete. The roadway excavation quantities do not account for the excavation required for the island work. The quantities only account for the concrete curb removal, but no excavation. Can the earthwork quantities be adjusted for the island paving, gore brushed concrete, minor concrete, etc.?Inquiry submitted 12/12/2017

Inquiry #22: Refer to sheet 215 construction note 31 as a typical example. Please confirm that note indicates all is existing to remain and no new work is required under the contract. Inquiry submitted 12/13/2017

Inquiry #26: On plan sheet Q-9 under Minor Concrete, it shows that we are constructing a new island from Sta 133+63 to 158+70. The typical cross sections do not show the existing island being reconstructed nor can we find a construction detail for this island reconstruction.

1. Are we removing the existing island?2. Do the bid items for remove concrete or roadway excavation reflect this work?3. If the existing island is being reconstructed, can Caltrans provide a detailed construction section for the new island and revise the typical roadway sections to show this?Inquiry submitted 12/13/2017

Inquiry #27: Does District 04 plan on letting prospective bidders know by way of the Special Provisions or this inquiry page whether your Agency is having the trees removed to stump prior to bid time on this project and all others in District 04?Inquiry submitted 12/13/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 12/14/2017

Response #2:Bid per plans and specs. Trees will be removed prior to roadway widening.Response posted 12/21/2017

Inquiry #28: Please refer to Inquiry #20, and the CDOT reply. As stated previously, the Road Plans, L-I, shows an Anchor Block at Station FRT 21+17.21 Rt., as detailed on C-5. The Structure Plans show a Concrete Barrier, Transition, at the same location, detailed on sheet 338, 4 of 5.Are these the same work, duplicated?Inquiry submitted 12/13/2017

Inquiry #29: Bid Item #38 Lean Concrete Base 810CY appears to greater than our takeoff quantity of +/- 500CY. If you look at the summary of quantities on sheet Q-2 on MR1 153+25.31 to 158+65.48 referred to on L-11 the quantity of 540CY is what seems to be incorrect.Inquiry submitted 12/14/2017

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 12/15/2017

Response #2:Bid per plans.Response posted 12/29/2017

Inquiry #30: On page 35 of the Special Provisions, Section 39-2.01C(3)(c) Prime Coat: Apply a slow setting.......... There is no bid item for Prime Coat. Is a Prime Coat required over the AB and AS? If so, please provide a bid item for Prime Coat or state what bid item(s) the Prime Coat is to be included.Inquiry submitted 01/04/2018

Response #1:Submitted for consideration.Response posted 01/04/2018

Inquiry #31: Please confirm for the purposes of section 12-4.02C(3)(a) which tasks and operations (1-11) will be considered paving for the following items of work:

The information provided in the responses to bidder inquiries is not a waiver of Section 2-1.07, "JOB SITE AND DOCUMENT EXAMINATION" of the Standard Specifications or any other provision of the contract, nor to excuse the contractor from full compliance with the contract. Bidders are cautioned that subsequent responses or contract addenda may change a previous response.

Contracting Information

REBUILDING CALIFORNIA - Senate Bill 1

Senate Bill 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 invests $54 billion over the next decade to fix roads, freeways and bridges. See where the money is going at www.rebuildingca.ca.gov